Category Archives: Technique

Amateur Aesthetic

Posted on by
Reply

Today, another example of the “Amateur Aesthetic” or “Snapshot Aesthetic”made popular by such contemporary photographers as Terry Richardson, after Diane Arbus and Nan Goldin, two of my favourites.

Here’s mine, a high-key model shot:

We call it amateur, or snapshot, because you use a flash straight on, and aim at the subject, and have the subject stand in front of a white backdrop, camera aware. Like Uncle Fred does. This gives you the drop shadow. It also, however, gives you very flattening light, and models like this: it hides any facial features. Overexposing a little, or rather, exposing brightly, makes it even better in that regard.

Unlike your Uncle Fred, my models and I think carefully about composition, light, and expression and pose. The direct flash means you need to aim the subject’s face down a little, else light comes “from below”, which is never flattering.

So nothing is left to accident, in spite of the amateur look.

For this shot, I used 1/160th sec, 400 ISO, f/5.6 and an on-camera 600EX flash. The flash compensation, like in the examples of a few days ago, was set to +2 stops, and I used TTL flash metering for flexibility.

Your assignment for today: shoot a portrait like this. I am about to teach a TTL flash course, and my student will do this as well. In addition to “proper” flash, you need to know techniques like this as just another tool in your toolbox.

 

les animaux

Posted on by
Reply

Shooting animals, there is one thing you have to take into account. Namely, that they have snouts, where the nose and eyes are far apart in distance when they look at you. Unlike in the case of humans, where our eyes and nose are quite close.

This is important why? Because of focus. Where f/5.6 may be enough for a face to be in focus, in an animal, invariably it isn’t, and you will get either a sharp nose, or sharp eyes. Anyone who has taken pictures of their pet will know this. Especially when using fast lenses indoors.

The solution?

There’s the usual suspects: to get more depth of field, you need any combination of:

  • a wider angle (shorter) lens, i.e. “zooming out”, or
  • you get farther from your subject, or
  • you use a smaller aperture (higher “f-number”).

Or, perhaps the simplest solution: you do not shoot them straight on.

See. we have narrow depth of field, but it is not annoying us here. Both nose and closest eye are in sharp focus.

Bonus question: what about the light?

I am bouncing my flash behind me. You can see that by the catch light: a circle on the ceiling behind me, lit up by my flash.

___

Want to learn video with your DSLR? Come to my 3-hour seminar in Oakville on Sunday, 30 March. This seminar is limited to no more than 6 people. In this three hour lesson, Michael teaches you:

  • Perfect camera settings for each situation
  • The secret to achieving focus
  • Additional equipment to consider
  • Avoiding the 5 common mistakes
  • Audio: The forgotten essential.
  • Three ways to Make It Better.
  • Composition of your images
  • Types of shot and how to use them
  • Storytelling in a video: using B-roll, script, and storyboarPost-production tips

Your DSLR is a great tool for movie-quality videos, but only if you know the secrets to its effective use. Space is limited: sign up now via http://cameratraining.ca/Booking.html.

 

Effective Black and White

Posted on by
Reply

Black and white (“Monochrome”) is very effective when you want to draw attention to the subject, not the surrounding “stuff”. We should all do more black and white.

I find that in particular, high-key photos like this benefit greatly from being in B/W:

Any colour in the walls etc take away from the effectiveness. And B/W makes it much easier to make a face really stand out in this kind of light.

How do you do a picture like that? Very simple:

  • Camera on manual.
  • 800 ISO, 1/125th sec, f/5.6.
  • Flash Exposure Compensation set to +2 stops.
  • Flash aimed up, behind me. .

Why 800 ISO? To give the flash enough power. Why Flash Exposure Compensation? It’s a white scene and I want the camera to shoot it as such.

A little post work can be good in “documentary” shots like this:

Wide angle lens creates pleasing shapes.

And that post work I mentioned consists of B/W conversion, cropping/rotating, and adding a little contrast and a little film grain. Yes, ADDING film grain. Film grain (a standard option in Lightroom’s DEVELOP module, in the EFFECTS pane) is nice (unlike digital noise). Makes this look like an old B/W film picture.

Photography is such a rewarding activity.

___

Video too! I now have a new course, “Video with your DSLR”: see www.cameratraining.ca or ask me for private training. Worth it, learning to do pro video!

 

Terry

Posted on by
Reply

If you read this blog, you know I am all about proper lighting. And proper lighting is about off-camera flash technique, modifiers, and so on.

But it is also about making exceptions. One of those is what I like to call the “Terry Richardson look”. Look him up: he is one of the world’s most highly paid photographers and his typical work consists of putting famous people (think Barack Obama, Miley Cyrus, and every other celebrity) against a white wall and shooting with a direct, on-camera flash.

Normally, this is a recipe for disastrous snapshots. But he somehow carries it off, and we call it the “punk/amateur aesthetic”. And so I like to think I can carry it off too. Have a look at some shots from yesterday:

So why do these work, against all better judgment?

Because they have a recognizable look. And because they are what I would call urban cool. And they provide wonderful, even, beauty lighting that compliments skin and fills in any facial features (think wrinkles). And because lighting skin brightly is very complimentary. This Terry Richardson technique can take ten years off someone’s age.

The images above were made in the studio with a simple on-camera flash aimed straight into the subject’s face. I used TTL flash and (this is crucial) I set flash exposure compensation (FEC) to +2 stops. 400 ISO, f/5.6, 1/125th second.  You need a powerful flash (I used a 600 EX): the pop-up flash will not do.

But the above is all you need. And—here’s the kicker—because of this simple, all-filling light, no post work needed to be done on these images.

A few more examples:

Triptychs work well, too:

So this technique may look like a snapshot technique, but it is in fact well thought out and executed. Of course I would not recommend doing this in all your pictures, if only because twenty years from now, this will look dated. But for sure, Mr Richardson is on to something here. And I am happy to have this available as one of my techniques.

___

Note: if you want to also see the nudes from this session, head on over to mvwphoto.tumblr.com

 

Metering 101

Posted on by
Reply

Light meter at “zero” means a good picture. Right?

Wrong.

Shoot something black, filling the entire viewfinder with that object, and make sure the light meter points at “zero” as you are pointing at the subject (use the viewfinder!). Take the picture.

You get this:

The histogram shows why this is bad:

A histogram of a black object should peak on the left (the dark side).

Now do it again, with the light meter pointing at –2 (minus 2):

Perfect. Look, the histogram is right for this type of scene:

The moral of this post:

  • “The meter displays zero” does not equal “this will be a good picture”. It merely means “this will be a mid-grey picture, neither dark nor light”.
  • “The meter points to minus” does not equal “this will be a bad picture”. It merely means “this will be a dark picture”.
  • “The meter points to minus” does not equal “this will be a bad picture”. It merely means “this will be a dark picture”.

And there you have it. Now you understand the camera’s built-in light meter.

 

 

 

 

 

An HDR from one RAW shot

Posted on by
Reply

Consider this image from Aruba, of a rental car inside:

Without a flash, a dynamic range like that is difficult. So look at the before/after:

And so yes, from that image on the left with its very black blacks and blown out whites I can still get back to a reasonable picture—provided I shot in RAW, of course. Here’s my develop settings:

This gives me a sort of one-image HDR.

What lens what used, you ask? My standard ultra-wide, the 16-35mm f/2.8 lens set to its widest 16mm zoom. Shot at 1/100th sec at f/5.6, 200 ISO.

 

 

Jello cam

Posted on by
Reply

I a teaching video with DSLR to a high school for a few days. Fun stuff: you can do so much movie stuff with a modern DSLR. As long as you know the limitations, you can do pro work—and then some. Today, a few randomly selected tips to give you a taste. Worked all day, up at 6am, so a very quick post. Don’t worry, I will make it up to you all!

One of the DSLR video limitations is focus. Tip: generally, do not try to focus during a scene; instead, focus before the scene on where the subject will be. Shoot short clips. Re-focus for each clip. If you must focus during a clip, use manual focus only.

Another one is sound. The built-in microphone is not very good (to say the least). Here’s a cool tip: use one or more iPhones to capture sound, and in post-production, mix that with (or use that instead of) the camera’s captured sound.

Finally, with a CMOS equipped camera, avoid the jello-cam effect:

This is due to the fact that the sensor is read from top to bottom. While it is being read, the prop moves. Weird effects ensure.

Anyway: get ready, More to come about video. You have a great video tool: let’s use it!

 

 

Narrow depth of field in studio-type pictures

Posted on by
Reply

Normally, if you ask me “what is the studio portrait setting”, I would say 1/125th sec, f/8, 200 ISO.But sometimes, even when you are essentially shooting “studio-type” photos, you can use narrow depth of field.

Like in this picture, where the only thing that is in the plane of focus (i.e. that is sharp) is the face:

This was an 85mm lens set to f/1.4. The light was a bounced (behind me) flash. The f/1.4 gives us a depth of field just enough to have the face, and only the face, sharp.

So when you do a portrait, ask “what type of portrait”. You will not often want to go as wide as f/1.4, but the question is always the same. Whether you are in a studio, or shooting studio-type flash pictures in any environment.

 

Trails

Posted on by
Reply

Consider this, the Aruba resort I stayed at:

So how do I decide on the settings for a shot like this?

First, of course I need a tripod.

  1. I want the trails. To get these, I need a long exposure time, of 10 seconds.
  2. To get this, I need a low ISO, so I start at 100.
  3. Then, with exposure time and ISO given, I figure out the aperture I need. Which was f/16.
  4. That’s good – because the “starburst” effect is due to the small aperture of f/16.
  5. If I had needed a smaller aperture than f/16 (say, f/45), I would have had to increase ISO. If I had needed a large aperture (say, f/4), I would have had to wait until it was darker, or I would have had to use a neutral density filter.

Simple. Right?

 

Live View—a tip

Posted on by
Reply

Live View (seeing the photo on the back of the camera instead of through the viewfinder) is not generally recommended. Use the viewfinder!

Except in a few special circumstances.

Namely, you would use Live View when you need accurate manual focusing. This is often the case when shooting macro, or product, or night pictures, when the camera’s autofocus either will not work well, or is not accurate enough.

On many cameras, like on my Canon bodies, you can:

  1. Set focus to “manual” (slide on the lens goes to “M”);
  2. Put the camera on a tripod;
  3. Activate Live View;
  4. Zoom in on the preview (press the “+” loupe symbol, or just the loupe symbol on many Nikon bodies). Repeatedly: on the Canons, when you press it twice, the preview shows (10x” (i.e. 10x magnification);
  5. Now focus accurately by hand;
  6. Now turn off live view.

You are now ready to shoot. Ensure that your subject and camera do not move, and that you do not zoom in or out after focusing (most lenses will lose focus if you do), and especially, that you do not accidentally move the focus ring.

I am writing this as I prefer to do some night sky shots in the next few days, provided I can find a clear sky without too much light pollution.

By the way, my favourite lens for night sky shots is my 35mm f/1.4, which offers pretty much the best combination of:

  • Large real aperture diameter (means more light gathering) and
  • Wider angle (means longer times are possible without creating star trails. To understand why, imagine a telescope: the longer it is, the more the stars will move).

14 seconds at 1600 ISO at f/1.4 should do it. And at that aperture, accurate focusing is essential—which brings us back to where we started: manual focus using Live View.